Is there a "best" FSU?

Hi,

Not many seem to have the Leningrad which has the widest speed range and a 60mm RF base.

Trouble is, my one needs a lot of work done on it and I can't find someone to do it. But it would be great to have it restored to fully working and then add a J-3 perhaps and an instruction manual...

Regards, David
 
Used to have a FED-S 'Komandirski', the FED-1 with 1/1000th top and a 2.0/50mm Summar clone and loved it.


Now, having left rangefinders, I would suggest either a Moskva medium format or a Zenit Start. And if you're into M42 lenses, get a Mir 26N lens, (it's a 2.0/35mm Flektogon clone), a simple Helios 44M (2.0/58mm Biotar clone) and a Jupiter-11 4.0/135 and you're set with great Russian glass and a busload of M42 bodies.
 
nukecoke said:
...
The advance stroke is indeed long, I find double pump is the best way, definitely quicker than FED-2's knob turning, for me.
Click to expand...

I think, you have tried earlier, gunked FED-2 with Zorki like knob.
My CLA'd once FED-2 has large diameter knob and with index finger method it is as fast if not quicker to advance comparing to Z-6. My FED-2 is so smooth and light on advance it is hard to tell if film is loaded. :)
 
Which year is yours Z-6?
Click to expand...

1963 and 1965. Both shutters are going smooth and not much louder then an M7.

The advance stroke of a Z-6 is indeed large but it is going better then a Z-4 or Kiev-4AM. Although the build quality of a Kiev-2/3/4 can be very good. But the lock on infinity from a Contax/Kiev is not always very handy.

Further the choice of lenses in Contax/Kiev bayonet is not so large then LTM lenses which are widely available.

And it is handy to have the tripod 3/8" to 1/4" adapter.
 
David Hughes said:
Hi,

If people fussed over them and spent as much time/money on them as they do on other maker's cameras, all of them would be great. Luckily they are nowhere near as expensive to repair and get into fine working order as other cameras. That's based on my experience as the owner and user of several Leicas and a Contax of roughly the same age as the ex-USSR ones.

The trouble is a lot of people judge them after buying a secondhand one and expecting it to work perfectly. Old cameras are not like that and often need a little TLC before giving their best again. Once put back into full working order there's little to distinguish my Leica II from my FED 1. And I could tell some horror stories about Leicas bought for serious money from serious dealers.



This is true up to a point.

Some FSU cameras, particularly Leica clones manufactured in the 1950's can be reliable, if somewhat crude, shooters, even as received. Others, manufactured in the 1970's and later, were badly made and hopeless junk; servicing these is a hopeless waste of time and money.

My own experience has been favorable with Zorki 1's and the Zorki 3. The Zorki 3 especially was a nice useable camera. These are the only two FSU cameras I would consider again. Later model Feds and Zorkis were troublesome with issues such as light leaks.

I had nothing but unhappy experience with Kiev 4's where the complicated shutter and poor manufacturing prevented these from ever being useful. This after two trips to Oleg for repair. I like the feel of a Kiev/Contax but never again. The fit and finish of these is a good indication of what was inside.

Regarding lenses, I've found the Jupiter 8 and Jupiter 12's to be entirely useable. A potential issue with the silver J-8's is that the helicoid lubricant often solidifies and the lens need be dismantled to relube.

My J-3's were fine after I had them shimmed, about 50% of them needed reshimming.

The Industar 50mm f3.5 has the finest build quality of any Russian lens that I've used, really well-made things. I've tested a number of these photographing newspaper targets on a wall and found that these were all OK lenses but none of them (12 or so) were quite as sharp as any Elmar 50mm f3.5 that I tested.
Click to expand...
 
This is one situation where you agree that "there exists a best FSU camera", but it is unclear whether "there exists an excellent FSU camera".
 
The Industar 50mm f3.5 has the finest build quality of any Russian lens that I've used, really well-made things.
Click to expand...

You are right about this lens. One of the sharpest lenses. Mine was completely stuck in the old Green Sovjet grease but after a complete revision everything is running very smooth and this lens is indeed remarkable good.
 
raid said:
This is one situation where you agree that "there exists a best FSU camera", but it is unclear whether "there exists an excellent FSU camera".
Click to expand...

Hi,

Trouble is, I can think of several top makes of film camera that the comment about excellence applies to.

My wife and I often used the same make and model of camera - it made/makes life easy when travelling. One or two of the pairs from one of the top three makers were excellent and better than average depending on which camera was being used.

On holidays, of course, we often took almost the same picture at the same time with the same make and model of camera using the same film and lab. Then the differences were very clear. At the time the worst pair were about 9 or 10 years old...

I blame this modern habit of batch sampling.

Regards, David
 
Fotohuis said:
You are right about this lens. One of the sharpest lenses. Mine was completely stuck in the old Green Sovjet grease but after a complete revision everything is running very smooth and this lens is indeed remarkable good.
Click to expand...

Rigid version of I-50 is ugly duckling in terms of design and awkward in using it. It is sharp, without overdone contrast and gives pleasing results.
I-10, 22 and 50 are different lenses apart from each other.
 
nukecoke said:
Believe me or not, it's the digital mirrorless with adapted rangefinder lenses that brought me back to film rangefinder cameras :D.
Click to expand...

Me too. I had largely ignored film before mounting an old Nikon 50mm 1.8 on my X-T1. I fell in love with old glass and, well, here I am... :)
 
raid said:
This is one situation where you agree that "there exists a best FSU camera", but it is unclear whether "there exists an excellent FSU camera".
Click to expand...

This hasn't been my experience. I feel they're very good cameras when properly serviced, and frankly -- for my use -- good as any old Leica. I particularly like the diopter adjustment on the Fed 2 camera. The image just snaps into focus in a way an old Leica doesn't (and I've owned too many Leica to freely admit in public -- basically everything except the iconic M3).

The problem is that people purchase a Fed or Zorki for $40, and then are loath to pay more to get it serviced. Virtually all old cameras need service !!!!! It doesn't matter who manufactured them. That's just a product of time.

The one qualification I add is that my experience is limited to Fed2s, Zorki 4 and Kiev 2 -- all of them dated from the 1950's and early 60's. I don't know much about other models or younger cameras. But so far I've been impressed.
 
Perhaps I've been lucky, but both my Kiev 4s have been good performers. That said, if and when they do die, I'll probably find some other way to shoot Jupiter-8s. The only camera I own that feels more awkward to operate is my Moscow 5...
 
I distnguish "excellent" work from "very good" work. :)
I said that FSU cameras are not excellent.


Raid

steveyork said:
This hasn't been my experience. I feel they're very good cameras when properly serviced, and frankly -- for my use -- good as any old Leica. I particularly like the diopter adjustment on the Fed 2 camera. The image just snaps into focus in a way an old Leica doesn't (and I've owned too many Leica to freely admit in public -- basically everything except the iconic M3).

The problem is that people purchase a Fed or Zorki for $40, and then are loath to pay more to get it serviced. Virtually all old cameras need service !!!!! It doesn't matter who manufactured them. That's just a product of time.

The one qualification I add is that my experience is limited to Fed2s, Zorki 4 and Kiev 2 -- all of them dated from the 1950's and early 60's. I don't know much about other models or younger cameras. But so far I've been impressed.
Click to expand...
 
raid said:
I distnguish "excellent" work from "very good" work. :)
I said that FSU cameras are not excellent.


Raid
Click to expand...

Hi,

What you say is true but I've looked at the price of an excellent camera body and a set of excellent lenses and I reckon I could buy a "very good" new car for that sort of money. We are, after all's said and done, talking about several thousands...

Regards, David
 
Hi,

I always see threads about former-USSR made cameras as containing two inter-mingled threads; one is reality and the other is reputation.

Alas, reputation is spread by the internet and so seen by millions but there aren't millions of FSU camera users to counter it with a dose of reality.

Regards, David
 
you mean camera, or you mean member country? :D

Probably the Iskra.

If you want reliability, tho, a Smena is great. It never produced competitive pictures with its crappy specs but it goes on and on and on without breaking.
 
I think best can be broken down to two categories. 'Best' from a feature set point of view and best from a 'user' point of view. A good user might not be technically the best, but because it works, it becomes the best by default. For me, best is the Zorki 6.
 
David Hughes said:
Hi,

I always see threads about former-USSR made cameras as containing two inter-mingled threads; one is reality and the other is reputation.

Alas, reputation is spread by the internet and so seen by millions but there aren't millions of FSU camera users to counter it with a dose of reality.

Regards, David
Click to expand...

People want to believe that what they have in their camera bag is the "best" as if there is some magic line of demarcation that separates those cameras capable of good photographs from those that are not. And "best" is often measured by how much something costs, coupled with historical significance, and unfortunately how cute it looks hanging from your shoulder, but anyone with an ounce of experience knows that good pictures depend on light, composition and creativity, and not gear. Any camera can take good pictures. Parenthetically, this is what drives me nuts about the digital crowd with their 'pixel peeping.'

Sorry for the rant ... I used to be part of that 'country club' crowd. Still use a Leicaflex SL though. Great camera.

"Best" for me has really evolved into which camera is easy to use, because that has somewhat of a correlation on the quality of my pictures. And in this regard, some of the FSU stuff (e.g., Fed 2) rates high.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom